This article was downloaded by: [Bibliothèque de l' Université Paris Descartes]
On: 18 November 2013, At: 00:30
Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered
office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
Aging, Neuropsychology, and Cognition:
A Journal on Normal and Dysfunctional
Development
Publication details, including instructions for authors and
subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/nanc20
Strategy selection and aging: Impact of
item concreteness in paired-associate
task
a
Isabelle Tournier & Virginie Postal
a
a
Université Victor Segalen Bordeaux 2, Laboratoire de Psychologie ,
Bordeaux, France
Published online: 10 Jan 2011.
To cite this article: Isabelle Tournier & Virginie Postal (2011) Strategy selection and aging: Impact
of item concreteness in paired-associate task, Aging, Neuropsychology, and Cognition: A Journal on
Normal and Dysfunctional Development, 18:2, 195-213, DOI: 10.1080/13825585.2010.525623
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13825585.2010.525623
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the
“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,
our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to
the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions
and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,
and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content
should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources
of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,
proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or
howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising
out of the use of the Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any
substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,
systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &
Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/termsand-conditions
Aging, Neuropsychology, and Cognition, 18: 195–213, 2011
http://www.psypress.com/anc
ISSN: 1382-5585/05 print; 1744-4128 online
DOI: 10.1080/13825585.2010.525623
Downloaded by [Bibliothèque de l' Université Paris Descartes] at 00:30 18 November 2013
Strategy selection and aging: Impact of
item concreteness in paired-associate task
Isabelle Tournier and Virginie Postal
Université Victor Segalen Bordeaux 2, Laboratoire de Psychologie, Bordeaux France
ABSTRACT
The aim of this study was to examine the effect of aging on strategy selection in a
paired-associate word task. Twenty-eight younger adults (mean age = 20.68 years) and
28 older adults (mean age = 68.46 years) studied 39 pairs of concrete, middle and
abstract words. The concreteness level was manipulated in order to modify the benefit
of imagery and sentence strategies in relation to task characteristics. The results showed
an age difference in strategy selection in relation to concreteness level. Older adults
showed less adaptive strategy selection for the imagery strategy but not for the sentence
strategy. Change in strategy selection did not seem to be explained by better efficiency
of sentence than imagery, so this study suggests a partial reduction of strategy adaptivity
during aging.
Keywords: Age differences; Strategy selection; Paired associate learning; Words
characteristics; Imagery; Sentence.
INTRODUCTION
Strategy adaptivity is necessary for good adaptation to a changing world. In
the domain of aging, the study of cognitive strategies has become a major
interest for researchers trying to understand cognitive decline and more particularly memory modification. A possible explanation is that a decrease
with age in the use or effectiveness of encoding strategies could explain
the decline in associative memory in older adults (Light, 1991; Verhaeghen
& Marcoen, 1994). Two major concurrent hypotheses have been proposed:
either older adults do not use effective strategies spontaneously or they fail
to execute these strategies efficiently (Dunlosky, Hertzog, & Powell-Moman,
Address correspondence to: Isabelle Tournier, Université Victor Segalen Bordeaux 2, Laboratoire de
Psychologie, Santé et Qualité de Vie, EA 4139, 3 Place de la Victoire, 33076 Bordeaux CEDEX. France.
E-mail: [email protected]
© 2011 Psychology Press, an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an Informa business
Downloaded by [Bibliothèque de l' Université Paris Descartes] at 00:30 18 November 2013
196 ISABELLE TOURNIER AND VIRGINIE POSTAL
2005; Light, 1991). In favour of the first explanation, research has shown
that older adults seem less likely than younger individuals to initiate effective strategies spontaneously (Hulicka & Grossman, 1967), particularly for
imagery (Dunlosky & Hertzog, 1998; Whitbourne & Slevin, 1978). However,
in accordance with the second explanation, the benefit of strategy instruction
is sometimes lesser in older than in younger participants (Dirkx & Craik,
1992). For example, older subjects did not attain the same level of performance as younger ones (Hulicka & Grossman, 1967), or they failed to
increase their performance (Isingrini, Fontaine, Métras, & Bonneau, 1994;
Mason & Smith, 1977). This decrease in effectiveness could be explained
by other processes like difficulties in retrieving and decoding of constructed
mediators in a paired-associated task (e.g., Dunlosky et al., 2005).The two
hypotheses have been very frequently opposed in the literature, but it appears
important to consider them together rather than as two dichotomous explanations. The decrease in memory performance with aging could be explained
by the decline not only in the use but also in the effectiveness of encoding
strategies (Naveh-Benjamin, Brav, & Levy, 2007). Moreover, when studying
strategy adaptivity to changing success rates with a dynamic and complex
air-traffic control task, Schunn and Reder (2001) noted that the best strategy
might not be the same from one individual to another. A person could use
a less efficient strategy because it is the best strategy for them, whereas a
more efficient strategy would be too effortful. This conclusion obtained in
the context of a complex task could be applied to less complex situations
like paired-associated memory tasks. Studies about memory during aging
provide evidence for this approach. A study by Verhaeghen and Marcoen
(1994) suggested that age differences in strategy use can be explained by
age differences in cognitive abilities. Indeed cognitive reduction associated
with aging could reduce the ability of older adults to use effortful encoding strategies (Bryan, Luszcz, & Pointer, 1999; Salthouse, 1991; Taconnat et
al., 2006). This shows the need to investigate simultaneously the efficiency
and cost implementation of strategies. Hence, research into decision-making
has proposed that strategy selection is the result of the cost and benefit of
strategy implementation (Mata, Schooler, & Rieskamp, 2007). Benefits correspond to the efficiency and accuracy of strategies, whereas costs are seen
in terms of the cognitive effort required to apply the strategy. For example, people might choose the best strategy for a given task in relation to
conscious or unconscious anticipation of the cost–benefit of each strategy
(Payne, Bettman, & Johnson, 1993). This estimation could be associated in
part with previous experience (Payne et al., 1993) and reinforcement learning (Rieskamp & Otto, 2006). Consequently an efficient strategy for younger
adults might not be so for older adults. Mata et al. (2007) showed that older
adults tend to choose simpler strategies more often than do young adults,
and that reduction of fluid intelligence explains this difference. Nevertheless,
Downloaded by [Bibliothèque de l' Université Paris Descartes] at 00:30 18 November 2013
STRATEGY SELECTION AND AGING
197
their results suggest that older adults remain capable of adaptive selection of
decision strategies. Siegler and Lemaire (1997) defined strategy adaptivity as
the capacity to choose the best strategy according to task characteristics, strategy characteristics and self-competencies. Three other dimensions have been
specified by these authors: the whole set of several strategies to accomplish
tasks (repertory), the employment proportion of each strategy (frequency)
and lastly the speed and accuracy of execution (efficiency).
In the domain of arithmetic problems, several studies have suggested
that older adults are less efficient than young adults in choosing the best
strategy in relation to problem characteristics (Duverne & Lemaire, 2004,
2005; Lemaire, Arnaud, & Lecacheur, 2004; Yagoubi, Lemaire, & Besson,
2003, 2005). Concerning memory tasks, Dunlosky and Hertzog (1998, 2001)
have shown that both young and older adults possess the same strategy
repertory, with several strategies for learning paired-associate words. In the
paired-associate task, effective strategies may include a mediator for linked
pair-words (Richardson, 1998), the mediator being an image associating the
two words (imagery strategy) or a sentence including the two words (sentence
strategy). Another less effective strategy is the rote repetition of words (repetition strategy). Finally, other strategies are sometimes used or individuals
may use no strategy at all. Previous studies have suggested that imagegeneration ability declines with aging (Craik & Dirkx, 1992; Dror & Kosslyn,
1994; Kemps & Newson, 2005) and that older adults produce more general
images and report more irrelevant details about them (Palladino & De Beni,
2003). Moreover, older adults seem to prefer to use sentences rather than
imagery when any strategy instruction is given (Hulicka & Grossman, 1967;
Rowe & Schnore, 1971). Using strategy reports for each paired-associate
word of their study, Dunlosky and Hertzog (1998) showed that older adults
are able to comply with instructions to use imagery, and interestingly that
both young and older adults reported using imagery for only 70% of items.
This observation suggests that another factor could determine the use of a
given strategy.
The question of compliance with recommended strategies is also
central in the literature concerning memory training for elderly people.
Generally memory training involves presentation of several memory strategies that could help older people to reduce memory difficulties during daily
life. The use of imagery strategy is regularly suggested to the elderly in order
to improve their memory. Unfortunately the beneficial long-term effect of
memory training is not constant (Ball et al., 2002; Scogin & Bienias, 1988;
Stigsdotter & Bäckman, 1989), and O’Hara et al. (2007) observed that at
5-year follow-up, only 40% of participants reported using memory strategies
versus 93% immediately after the training. In 1985, Yesavage noted that
older adults often have difficulty in using memory strategies because of the
difficulty to form visual images or encode associated visual images. Another
Downloaded by [Bibliothèque de l' Université Paris Descartes] at 00:30 18 November 2013
198 ISABELLE TOURNIER AND VIRGINIE POSTAL
study by Yesavage and his team (Yesavage, Sheikh, Friedman, & Tanke,
1990) suggested that the benefit of learned mnemonics varied in relation to
the complexity of mnemonics and to subtle cognitive impairment measured
by Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE; Folstein, Folstein, & McHugh,
1975). Thus, they showed that low MMSE scores affect more the use of
complex strategies than the use of easier strategies. This observation shows
the need to consider the cost–benefit of a strategy and not only its expected
benefit.
A possible explanation for this difficulty to use complex memory strategies in elderly people could be a decrease in cognitive resources. Derwinger,
Stigsdotter Neely, and Bäckman (2005) studied the impact of self-generated
strategy training in an 8-month follow-up. Using a four-digit number learning
task, they compared a group of older adults with specific mnemonic instructions and a group of older adults without specific mnemonic instructions
who were encouraged to use their own strategies. The aim was to encourage
the group with self-generated strategies to process information in relation to
their specific abilities and knowledge. Results 8 months later revealed that
self-generated strategy training was more effective than standard mnemonic
training when the testing task did not offer cognitive support. The authors
suggested that ‘memory intervention in old age may benefit from training
procedures focusing on skills optimal to the cognitive repertoire of older
individuals’ (p. 38) and thus reduce the lack of compliance and/or transfer
over time.
Considering the links between cognitive functions and strategy use
(Mata et al., 2007; Yesavage et al., 1990), aging could affect the selection
and execution of strategies, notably imagery, which is considered effortful and complex (Palladino & De Beni, 2003). Concerning sentence use,
Delaney (1978) found that young adults with high verbal ability used more
sentence strategies than did young adults with low verbal ability for learning
foreign-language-English word pairs. This shows the importance of individual abilities in strategy choice, and suggests that people with high language
skills could use sentence strategies more often. Thus, elderly adults could
prefer sentence strategies. Indeed, older adults generally have more vocabulary and more language expertise than did younger adults (Mathey & Postal,
2008; Verhaeghen, 2003), which may influence their tendency to use sentences rather than imagery when any specific instruction is given (Hulicka &
Grossman, 1967).
In this article, we focus more particularly on the impact of the characteristics of the information to be memorized on strategy selection. In 1993,
McDougall and Velmans examined the use of imagery and sentence strategies in relation to word characteristics. Young participants studied words
either spatially related (cake-oven) or categorically related (corn-oats), with
the assumption that spatial relationship would be a cue for imagery use and
Downloaded by [Bibliothèque de l' Université Paris Descartes] at 00:30 18 November 2013
STRATEGY SELECTION AND AGING
199
categorical relationship a cue for sentence use. Results were in accordance
with this expectation, with participants adjusting strategy selection in relation
to word characteristics.
The concrete-abstract dimension of words is well-known to influence
strategy selection. Paivio and Yuille (1969) showed that imagery is used more
for paired-associates composed of concrete words than of abstract words.
According to these authors, the imagery strategy could be used more than
other strategies with concrete words, while the verbal strategy (i.e., a word
or phrase connecting words) might be used more than other strategies with
abstract words. Furthermore, Treat and Reese (1976) found that imagery
mediators are more facilitatory than verbal mediators for learning concrete
pairs. This effect is explained by the fact that concrete pairs evoking mental
imagery readily are much more easily remembered than abstract pairs, which
are more difficult to mentally image (Richardson, 2003).
The purpose of this research was to study the effect of aging on strategy selection in relation to item concreteness during a paired-associate task.
Recent research on decision-making and resolution of arithmetic problems
suggested that older adults remain able to adapt to task characteristics, but
that their adaptivity is not as good as that of young adults (Duverne &
Lemaire, 2004, 2005; Lemaire et al., 2004; Mata et al., 2007; Yagoubi et al.,
2003, 2005). Since previous studies suggested that older adults use less efficient strategies, notably for imagery (Dunlosky & Hertzog, 1998; Hulicka &
Grossman, 1967; Whitbourne & Slevin, 1978), we investigated whether the
ability to choose the best strategy for a given situation also changes during
a paired-associate task. Consequently we chose to study strategy selection
and execution in order to study strategy adaptivity. The design of our task
resembles that of Dunlosky and Hertzog (1998). Young and older participants
performed a paired-associate task and strategy production was estimated with
item-by-item reports. However, we also manipulated the characteristics of
the information to be memorized by presenting concrete, middle and abstract
pairs of words. We hypothesized that manipulating the concreteness level
would make it possible to examine strategy adaptivity. Several strategies
were presented with instructions regarding the cost–benefit aspect of each.
The choice of strategies and the cost–benefit estimations were taken from
the literature concerning the use of strategies in a paired-associate task. The
fact that the instructions stated the cost–benefit ratio of the strategy in relation to word characteristics meant that both younger and older adults had the
same knowledge of this balance. Indeed, according to metamemory studies,
the subjective estimation of strategies and memory tasks may be modified
during aging (Cavanaugh & Poon, 1989; Dixon & Hultsch, 1983). Imagery
was described as the best cost–benefit balance for concrete pairs and sentence as the best cost–benefit balance for abstract pairs. Given that middle
concreteness level was not mentioned during instruction, we assumed that
Downloaded by [Bibliothèque de l' Université Paris Descartes] at 00:30 18 November 2013
200 ISABELLE TOURNIER AND VIRGINIE POSTAL
middle pairs would provide information about participants’ preferences for
imagery and sentence strategies. Participants were requested to use the best
strategy for each word pair in accordance with previous instructions about
cost–benefits, but were also told that they should feel at ease when making
decisions, in order to obtain the most natural-feeling decision. We hypothesized that with aging, there would a change of ratio in the strategies used
and in the efficiency of recall, with specific strategies being used in relation to the task characteristics. We expected that older adults would use less
imagery but more sentences than young adults, notably when the task characteristics influenced strategy selection less (middle pairs). Consequently we
hypothesized a partial decrease in strategy use during aging, as shown by
a decline when imagery was the adapted strategy and maintenance when
sentence was the adapted strategy. Concerning strategy efficiency, we hypothesized a decrease of efficacy with aging for imagery and to a lesser measure
for sentence. Furthermore, in accordance with Delaney (1978), we hypothesized that participants with higher verbal ability, measured by a vocabulary
test, used more sentence strategy than participants with lower verbal ability.
METHOD
Participants
Twenty-eight young participants (university undergraduates, range 18–
23 years, M = 20.68, SD = 1.59) and 28 older participants (senior university
learners, range 63–80 years, M = 68.46, SD = 4.58) took part in this study.
In order to screen for cognitive impairment, we included only participants
with a Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE; Folstein et al., 1975) score
of 26 or more. Older participants had more years of education than young
ones (respectively, M = 14.43, SD = 2.32 and M = 12.82, SD = 1.25), t(54)
= –3.23, p < .01. The level of vocabulary measured by the Mill–Hill test
(Deltour, 1998) was also greater in the older group (M = 41, SD = 2.07 vs.
M = 35.89, SD = 3.45), t(54) = –6.72, p < .001.
Design and materials
All participants studied a list of 39 paired associates distributed in 3
levels of concreteness. The 78 nouns were derived from norms of concreteness and subjective frequency of French words (Desrochers & Bergeron,
2000). Pairs were composed of nouns unrelated within each pair: 13 pairs
of concrete nouns (e.g., lettuce/hammer), 13 pairs of middle nouns (e.g.,
childhood/apparatus) and 13 pairs of abstract nouns (e.g., regret/instinct).
The values of imagery (Desrochers & Bergeron, 2000) extended from 6.27 to
6.89 for concrete pairs, from 4.58 to 5.41 for middle pairs and 2.17 to 3.12 for
abstract pairs. The number of syllables of nouns ranged from 2 to 4 and the
Downloaded by [Bibliothèque de l' Université Paris Descartes] at 00:30 18 November 2013
STRATEGY SELECTION AND AGING
201
mean subjective frequency was 4.79 for each word level (Content, Mousty, &
Radeau, 1990). Each pair was presented on a computer screen for 8 s during
which the participant had to memorize the words. We chose not to exceed
39 pairs in order not to exceed the cognitive resources of the participants, the
older ones. Practice was composed of four items with two concrete pairs, one
middle and one abstract pair. Given that concrete, middle, and abstract words
resulted from concreteness norms obtained from young and older adults, we
did not directly question participants about the concreteness level to make
sure that they distinguished the different levels. However, during the instructions, examples of concrete and abstract words were given and the participant
was encouraged to produce concrete and abstract words. The case of middle
pairs was orally presented, like words situated between concrete and abstract
level.
Procedure
Participants were tested individually and instructions were presented
in four phases on the computer screen (see the Appendix). For each phase,
after that the participant read the instructions, the experimenter explained
these instructions and encouraged the participant to ask questions or details.
The first slide displayed instructions to learn each of 39 pairs, presented
for 8 s, in order to recall later the second word of a given pair when the
word was prompted by the first word of the pair. The second slide described
in a jargon-free manner the three stages (encoding, storage and retrieval)
involved by memorization and highlighted the fact that the use of strategy
may improve memorization. The third slide presented successively the three
common strategies (imagery, sentence and repetition) and the cost–benefits
of these strategies in relation to the pair’s concreteness. The imagery strategy
was described as the fact of linking words within the same image, preferentially in making interacted items. The concrete word pair ‘guitar-church’
was presented as example and the image of a guitar in the shape of church
was given. The imagery strategy was depicted as very effortful but also very
efficacious for concrete words which are easy to form an image. The abstract
word pair ‘ambition-theory’ was presented then to illustrate the difficulty to
create an image of abstract words. The sentence strategy was described as
the fact of linking words within a same sentence. The sentence strategy was
depicted as less effortful than the imagery strategy but also less efficacious
for concrete words. On the contrary, sentence strategy was described as more
efficacious than imagery for words which are not easy to form an image,
such as abstract words. The abstract word pair ‘ambition-theory’ was presented and the sentence ‘the ambition to make a theory’ was proposed. The
repetition strategy was described as less effortful but also as less efficacious
than imagery or sentence strategies. Lastly, in the fourth slide, participants
were instructed to use for each pair the strategy that appeared to them as the
Downloaded by [Bibliothèque de l' Université Paris Descartes] at 00:30 18 November 2013
202 ISABELLE TOURNIER AND VIRGINIE POSTAL
most effective and with which they felt at ease. For concrete pairs, imagery
was described as effortful but the most effective, whereas sentence was presented as less effective than imagery. On the contrary, for abstract pairs,
sentence was presented as more efficient and less effortful than imagery.
Repetition was also described as less effortful than imagery and sentence
but too inefficient. Finally the benefit of using a strategy rather than no strategy was mentioned. Therefore, imagery was described as having the best
cost–benefit balance for concrete pairs and sentence as the best cost–benefit
balance for abstract pairs. No preferential strategy was mentioned for middle concreteness pairs. Four items of practice were used in order to allow
familiarization with the task. After the oral recall of the practice items, the
experimenter asked the name and a description of strategies used to make
sure that the participant understood the characteristics of each strategy and
how to implement it.
After practice trials, the fourth slide of instruction was again presented
and if the participant had no questions, the test began. Thirty-nine pairs were
displayed on a computer screen at a rate of 8 s per items in random order, and
with 3 s between every pair in order to prepare the next pair and limit interference in the learning of the different pairs. Immediately after the end of this
learning, an oral cued recall was proposed: The first word of a pair (e.g., lettuce – ?) was presented for a maximum of 15 s. Each pair appeared in a new
random order. The experimenter asked the participants to try to recall orally
the second word and to specify their strategy choice for this pair by categorizing it as ‘imagery’, ‘sentence’, ‘repetition or other strategy’, ‘none’. The
name of each strategy choice was written on a computer document given to
the participant for the recall. When the participant reported the use of imagery
or sentence, a description of mediator used was requested of the participants
in order to be sure that they made the correct strategy classification. In this
case, the first word of each pair remained on the screen until the production
of the mediator. Recall, strategy reports, mediator reports, and verbatim were
recorded by the experimenter.
This method of retrospective reports was shown to be a valid method
of reporting strategy production (Dunlosky & Hertzog, 2001). The category
‘repetition and other strategy’ avoids ‘imagery’ and ‘sentence’ categories
being used for strategies not relevant to them.
RESULTS
Like Dunlosky and Hertzog (1998), we calculated the percentage of time
that participants reported producing a given strategy and the proportion of
word pairs correctly recalled as a function of the reported strategy production. In order to investigate strategy adaptivity, we focused on the production
Downloaded by [Bibliothèque de l' Université Paris Descartes] at 00:30 18 November 2013
STRATEGY SELECTION AND AGING
203
and execution of imagery and sentence strategies, which were the two main
efficient strategies reported.
First, we studied the selection of these two strategies by young and
older adults. We conducted analysis of variance on the percentage of strategy use with age as the between subjects factor and concreteness and type
of strategy used as the within subjects factor. We also studied correlations
for each age group between the Mill–Hill score and strategy production for
each level of concreteness. Second, we studied the efficacy of strategy execution by conducting analysis of variance on the percentage of words correctly
recalled (recall performance), firstly for all pairs and secondly in relation to
concreteness level.
Strategy production
A 2 (age) × 3 (concreteness level) × 2 (strategy) analysis of variance
(ANOVA) was conducted. Table 1 summarizes mean production by the two
groups for the three concreteness levels. Analysis revealed a significant Age
effect, F(1, 54) = 9.58, p < .01, partial η2 = .151; with older adults producing fewer strategies than young adults (31.09 vs. 38.00%). Main effect of
Strategy effect was not significant because participants used imagery and sentence at similar rates (36.63% of imagery and 32.46% of sentence), F(1, 54)
= 1.69, p = .20, partial η2 = .030, whereas an effect of level concreteness occurred, F(2, 108) = 92.65, p < .001, partial η2 = .632. Post-hoc
analysis with the Newman–Keuls test with an α = .05 showed that more
strategies were produced for concrete pairs than for middle pairs (43.34
vs. 37.22%) and more were produced for middle pairs than abstract pairs
(37.22 vs. 23.08%). The interaction between Age and Strategy was significant, F(1, 54) = 5.83, p < .05, partial η2 = .097. Analysis showed that older
TABLE 1. Percentage of strategy production and standard errors (in
parentheses) for each concreteness level in relation to age and strategy
Strategy
Concreteness
Concrete
Middle
Abstract
M
Concrete
Middle
Abstract
M
Imagery
Younger adults
82.97 (3.22)
44.78 (3.82)
4.12 (1.34)
43.96
Older adults
64.83 (3.94)
22.25 (3.05)
0.82 (0.60)
29.30
Sentence
M
8.79 (1.94)
38.19 (3.68)
49.18 (4.72)
32.05
45.88
41.48
26.65
16.76 (2.65)
43.68 (5.17)
38.19 (5.04)
32.88
40.79
32.96
19.50
Downloaded by [Bibliothèque de l' Université Paris Descartes] at 00:30 18 November 2013
204 ISABELLE TOURNIER AND VIRGINIE POSTAL
adults used less imagery (29.30%) than did young adults (43.96%), F(1, 54)
= 24.10, p < .001, partial η2 = .308. The difference between young and
older adults was not reliable concerning sentence use, respectively 32.05 and
32.88%, F < 1. Young adults used more imagery than sentence, F(1, 54)
= 6.90, p = .01, partial η2 = .113, whereas older adults used as much as
imagery, F < 1. Results also showed a non-significant interaction between
Age and Concreteness level, F < 1. The interaction between Strategy and
Concreteness level was significant, F(2, 108) = 267.12, p < .001, partial
η2 = .832, showing that imagery was used more than sentence for concrete
pairs (73.90 vs. 12.77%), F(1, 54) = 276.07, p < .001, partial η2 = .836,
and that imagery was less used than sentence for abstract pairs (2.47 vs.
43.68%), F(1, 54) = 136.27, p < .001, partial η2 = .716. Concerning middle
pairs, no significant difference was observed between imagery and sentence
(respectively 33.52 and 40.93%), F(1, 54) = 2.19, p = .14, partial η2 = .039.
Finally we observed a significant interaction between Age, Strategy and
Concreteness level, F(2, 108) = 9.91, p < .001, partial η2 = .155. For the
concrete level, analysis revealed that both young (82.97 vs. 8.79%) and older
adults (64.83 vs. 16.76%) produced more imagery than sentence, respectively F(1, 54) = 203.26, p < .001, partial η2 = .790, and F(1, 54) =
85.39, p < .001, partial η2 = .612. However, older adults used less imagery
and more sentence than did young adults, respectively F(1, 54) = 12.67,
p < .001, partial η2 = .190, and F(1, 54) = 5.81, p < .05, partial η2 = .097.
For the middle level, young adults used imagery as much as sentence (44.78
vs. 38.19%), F < 1, whereas older adults used less imagery than sentence
(22.25 vs. 43.68%), F(1, 54) = 9.12, p < .01, partial η2 = .144. Older adults
used less imagery but used as many sentence as young adults, respectively
F(1, 54) = 21.27, p < .001, partial η2 = .283, and F < 1. Lastly, for the
abstract level, both young and older adults used more sentence than imagery
(young adults: 49.18 vs. 4.12%, older adults: 38.19 vs. 0.82%), respectively
F(1, 54) = 81.45, partial η2 = .601, and F(1, 54) = 56.01, p < .001, partial η2 = .509. Young adults produced more imagery than did older adults,
F(1, 54) = 5.02, p < .05, partial η2 = .085, but the same amount of sentence,
F(1, 54) = 2.53, p = .12, partial η2 = .045.
Both for young and older adults, we conducted correlations between
Mill–Hill score and production of sentence for concrete, middle and abstract
pairs. Results revealed only a significant correlation during abstract level for
the young adults (r = .44, p < .05). The other correlations both for young
and older adults were not significant.
Recall performance
To examine if the difference in strategy selection by young and older
adults could be due to a difference in strategy execution, we conducted a 2
(age) × 2 (strategy) for each level of concreteness. This design was used
STRATEGY SELECTION AND AGING
205
TABLE 2. Percentage of correct recall performance and standard errors (in
parentheses) for each concreteness level in relation to age and strategy
Strategy
Downloaded by [Bibliothèque de l' Université Paris Descartes] at 00:30 18 November 2013
Concreteness
Concrete
Middle
Abstract
Concrete
Middle
Abstract
Imagery
Younger adults
86.42 (5.69)
80.81 (4.63)
–
Older adults
55.67 (4.74)
49.10 (5.13)
–
Sentence
81.35 (9.54)
69.31 (4.77)
41.44 (4.39)
45.94 (7.96)
21.58 (5.28)
10.62 (4.56)
given that repeated-measures ANOVA removes the results of participants
with missing values, and because inclusion of concreteness level in ANOVA
would increase the number of excluded participants.1 Table 2 summarizes
means recall performance by the two age groups for the three concreteness
levels.2 For the concrete level, analysis revealed that older adults recalled
fewer pairs than did the young adults (50.81 vs. 83.89%), F(1, 37) = 16.54,
p < .001, partial η2 = .309. The main effect of strategy and the interaction
between Age and Strategy were not significant, respectively F(1, 37) = 1.42,
p = .24, partial η2 = .037, and F < 1. For the middle level, older adults again
recalled fewer pairs than did the young adults (35.34 vs. 75.06%), F(1, 47)
= 43.10, p < .001, partial η2 = .478. The imagery strategy was associated
with better recall than the sentence strategy (64.96 vs. 45.44%), F(1, 47) =
30.25, p < .001, partial η2 = .392. A significant interaction between Age and
Strategy, F(1, 47) = 5.10, p < .05, partial η2 = .098, revealed that the age
differences in recall were larger with sentence (21.58 vs. 69.31%) than with
imagery (49.10 vs. 80.81%). Lastly for abstract pairs, older adults recalled
fewer pairs than did young adults with sentence strategy (10.62 vs. 41.44%),
F(1, 52) = 23.71, p < .001, partial η2 = .313.
DISCUSSION
The object of our study was to compare strategy adaptivity in two age groups
during a paired-associate word task. The cost–benefit ratio varied in relation
1
Consequently, the number of participants included in the ANOVA was different according to concreteness
level. Only participants having used imagery and sentence were included for concrete level (i.e., 16 young
adults and 23 older adults) and middle level (i.e., 27 young adults and 22 older adults) ANOVA. For
abstract level, the factor ‘strategy’ was not studied given that too few participants used imagery for this
level, so 28 young adults and 26 older adults were included in the analysis.
2
Given the very low number of participants who used imagery for the abstract level, the corresponding
averages are not indicated in the table.
Downloaded by [Bibliothèque de l' Université Paris Descartes] at 00:30 18 November 2013
206 ISABELLE TOURNIER AND VIRGINIE POSTAL
to the selected strategies (imagery, sentence) and concreteness level of the
word pairs. Results revealed that the older adults used less efficient strategies than the young adults. More precisely, the older adults use less imagery
than the young adults but use as many sentences. This intergroup difference
suggested a partial decrease in strategy adaptivity during aging that was confirmed by the significant interaction between Age, Strategy and Concreteness
level. Whereas the young and the older adults used more imagery than sentence for concrete pairs and more sentence than imagery for abstracts pairs,
suggesting a good selection of strategy, the older adults used less imagery
than the young adults, which was particularly penalizing for concreteness
level. The results obtained for middle pairs were interesting because they
represented a certain level of uncertainty, given that no specific instruction
was given for these pairs and that they did not fit with concrete or abstract
categories. The older adults used less imagery but more sentence than young
adults, whereas young adults chose both strategies to the same extent. Our
results are in accordance with previous studies showing that older adults
without specific strategy instruction, that is the case for middle pairs, seem
to prefer to use sentence rather than imagery (Hertzog & Dunlosky, 2004;
Hulicka & Grossman, 1967; Rowe & Schnore, 1971; Whitbourne & Slevin,
1978). However, when strategies are suggested by instruction, older adults
remain capable of selecting effective strategies but to a lesser proportion than
younger adults. This contrasts with other research showing no differences
in selection of effective strategies when strategy instructions are given (e.g.,
Bailey, Dunlosky, & Hertzog, 2009). This discrepancy could be due to the
adaptation component involved in the present study. The difference in strategy selection might be due to age-related changes in the efficacy of imagery
use. In accordance with the literature concerning memory decline with aging,
our results show that recall performance declined with aging. At each concreteness level, older adults recalled fewer pairs than young adults. However,
both for concrete and middle pairs, imagery use seemed more efficient than
sentence use for older adults. Consequently, the fact that older adults used
less imagery than did young adults and preferred sentence use for middle
pairs cannot be explained by a change in cost–benefit ratio, with less benefit
from imagery use or more benefit from sentence use. Therefore, our hypothesis concerning strategy adaptivity during aging would seem to be confirmed,
as reflected by a decline when the adapted strategy is imagery, but not when
the adapted strategy is sentence. This result supports and extends similar findings obtained in decision-making and resolution of arithmetic problems, i.e.
older adults remain able to adapt their strategies but to a lesser extent than
young adults (Duverne & Lemaire, 2004, 2005; Lemaire et al., 2004; Mata
et al., 2007; Yagoubi et al., 2003, 2005). In the present study, we chose retrospective reports (i.e., the participant reported the strategy after the recall
of each pair) in order to avoid interference between the task (i.e., to learn
Downloaded by [Bibliothèque de l' Université Paris Descartes] at 00:30 18 November 2013
STRATEGY SELECTION AND AGING
207
paired-associate word) and the procedure (i.e., report the strategy used). The
retrospective reports allowed us to ask participants for a description of the
image or sentence created without influencing the implementation of the
strategy, because the question concerning the strategy was asked during the
recall rather than during the encoding phase. However, the delay between the
learning of the pair and the recall of the strategy could increase forgetfulness
about the strategy used, notably with a population presenting episodic memory deficits such as older adults (Dunlosky & Hertzog, 2001). The fact that
the strategy recall came after the recall of the pair could influence strategy
reporting, with imagery or sentence being reported for pairs recalled successfully and repetition or no strategy for pairs not recalled. The presence
of a description of the mediator used during imagery or sentence strategy
may have reduced this impact. A future study with concurrent reports ( i.e.,
the participant reports the strategy immediately after the learning of the pair,
before the recall) would throw light on this issue.
Our study suggests that older adults are as efficient as young adults
in selecting sentence strategies but not imagery strategies. Given that both
imagery and sentence are effortful strategies, this modification with age could
be the consequence of an aversion for imagery use or a preference for sentence use. An aversion for imagery use could be associated with specific
difficulties in implementing it. Previous works have suggested a decline with
aging of image-generation ability or image precision (Craik & Dirkx, 1992;
Dror & Kosslyn, 1994; Kemps & Newson, 2005; Palladino & De Beni, 2003;
Yesavage, 1985). On the other hand, older adults could prefer sentence use
because they generally have more vocabulary than young adults (Verhaeghen,
2003) and because an extended vocabulary could have a facilitatory effect on
sentence use. In the past, Delaney (1978) showed that younger adults with
high verbal ability used more sentence strategies than younger adults with
low verbal ability. We now replicate this result with young adults but not
with older adults. The young adults with higher vocabulary scores used sentence strategy more for abstract pairs. The fact that this relation was only
observed for abstract pairs could be explained by the presence at this level
of only one effective strategy (i.e., sentence). Thus, young adults with high
vocabulary level might use the effective sentence strategy more than rote repetition or no strategy. Regarding the absence of relation for older adults, we
observed a ceiling effect on the Mill–Hill vocabulary test and less variability for older adults whereas scores of young adults were lower and more
distributed. Since all the older adults had a high level of vocabulary, the
scores did not discriminate between them, which could explain the absence
of significant correlations between the level of vocabulary and the strategy
in this group. A previous study showed multiple-choice vocabulary test like
the Mill–Hill test tend to advantage older adults in comparison to production tasks that require words to be defined (Verhaeghen, 2003). Verhaeghen
Downloaded by [Bibliothèque de l' Université Paris Descartes] at 00:30 18 November 2013
208 ISABELLE TOURNIER AND VIRGINIE POSTAL
postulated that multiple-choice synonym tasks are not sensitive to an age
effect because they do not require word finding. More recently, Bowles and
Salthouse (2008) emphasized the fact that each vocabulary test measures different vocabulary constructs by calling upon different cognitive processes.
Regarding the links between high verbal ability and use of sentence strategy, Delaney (1978) measured verbal ability with a composite score of three
tasks, including a task similar to verbal fluency, and required that subjects
produce words beginning with a given prefix. Thus, the elaboration of sentences could be more associated with tasks requiring the production of words
(e.g., definition tasks, verbal fluency).
Strategy selection may be modified by previous experience and
reinforcement learning (Payne et al., 1993; Rieskamp & Otto, 2006).
Consequently, previous experiences of success or failing could influence
strategy selection. Thus, concerning pair recall, we observed a decline in
efficiency with aging both for imagery and sentence use, with older adults
recalling fewer pairs than young adults. This finding is in accordance with
data suggesting that declines in episodic memory cannot be explained solely
by strategy production (Dunlosky & Hertzog, 1998; Isingrini et al., 1994;
Mason & Smith, 1977; Naveh-Benjamin et al., 2007). Interestingly, the fact
that older adults recalled more middle pairs with imagery than sentence suggests that the lesser utilization of imagery is not due to the efficiency of each
strategy. Hertzog et al. (2009) found that knowledge about the superiority of
imagery over rote repetition during associative learning was relatively low
for participants. Thus, despite our finding about effectiveness of each strategy, older adults might have a false perception of how efficient imagery use
is, which makes them reticent to use imagery. Consequently, an important
question concerns the ability of older adults to learn about the effectiveness
of different strategies from their experience of tasks. By comparing strategy
utilization of imagery and rote repetition for two distinct lists of word pairs,
Price, Hertzog, and Dunlosky (2008) found that older adults learn about the
superiority of imagery of rote repetition during associative learning, but to a
lesser extent than young adults.
In this research we studied strategy selection during aging by considering the aspect of strategy adaptivity. Indeed, good strategy selection results
from a balance between the characteristics of strategies, tasks and individual competence (Lemaire et al., 2004), so it depends on a ratio between the
benefit of strategy use and the cost of cognitive effort (Mata et al., 2007).
Our results confirm a difference in strategy selection concerning imagery
and sentence use, as well as a difference in strategy use during aging. Older
adults used less imagery and more sentences, and showed weaker recall than
young adults for each strategy. Finally, our results show a partial reduction in
strategy adaptivity during aging, with a decline when imagery is the adapted
strategy and maintenance when sentence is the adapted strategy. Cognitive
Downloaded by [Bibliothèque de l' Université Paris Descartes] at 00:30 18 November 2013
STRATEGY SELECTION AND AGING
209
change associated with aging could produce changes in strategy adaptivity,
which is also influenced by previous experience (Payne et al., 1993) and
reinforcement learning (Rieskamp & Otto, 2006).The question of strategy
adaptivity during aging is essential because our daily environment changes,
so ‘aspects of a task change, the optimal strategy often changes, so adapting
one’s strategies is helpful’ (Schunn, Lovett, & Reder, 2001, p. 254). Future
studies should seek better understanding of the influence of individual characteristics and real life learning experience on the strategy adaptivity in older
adults.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
We thank OAREIL (Office Aquitain de Recherches, d’Etudes, d’Information et de Liaison
sur les problèmes des personnes âgées), its director Mr Jean-Jacques Amyot, as well as its
members. We also thank the anonymous reviewers for very helpful comments and suggestions
on earlier versions of this paper.
Original manuscript received 18 September 2009
Revised manuscript accepted 8 September 2010
First published online 10 January 2011
REFERENCES
Bailey, H., Dunlosky, J., & Hertzog, C. (2009). Does differential strategy use account for
age-related deficits in working-memory performance? Psychology and Aging, 24, 82–92.
Ball, K., Berch, D. B., Helmers, K. F., Jobe, J. B., Leveck, M. D., Marsiske, M., et al. (2002).
Effects of cognitive training interventions with older adults: A randomized controlled trial.
JAMA: Journal of the American Medical Association, 288, 2271.
Bowles, R. P., & Salthouse, T. A. (2008). Vocabulary test format and differential relations to
age. Psychology and Aging, 23, 366–376.
Bryan, J., Luszcz, M. A., & Pointer, S. (1999). Executive function and processing resources
as predictors of adult age differences in the implementation of encoding strategies. Aging,
Neuropsychology & Cognition, 6, 273.
Cavanaugh, J. C., & Poon, L. W. (1989). Metamemorial predictors of memory performance in
young and older adults. Psychology and Aging, 4, 365–368.
Content, A., Mousty, P., & Radeau, M. (1990). Brulex: une base de données lexicales
informatisée pour le français écrit et parlé. L’Année Psychologique, 90, 551–556.
Craik, F. I., & Dirkx, E. (1992). Age-related differences in three tests of visual imagery.
Psychology and Aging, 7, 661–665.
Delaney, H. D. (1978). Interaction of individual differences with visual and verbal elaboration
instructions. Journal of Educational Psychology, 70, 306–318.
Deltour, J. J. (1998). Echelle de vocabulaire Mill-Hill de J.-C. Raven, adaptation française.
Paris : EAP.
Derwinger, A., Stigsdotter Neely, A. S., & Bäckman, L. (2005). Design your own memory
strategies! Self-generated strategy training versus mnemonic training in old age: An 8month follow-up. Neuropsychological Rehabilitation, 15, 37–54.
Downloaded by [Bibliothèque de l' Université Paris Descartes] at 00:30 18 November 2013
210 ISABELLE TOURNIER AND VIRGINIE POSTAL
Desrochers, A., & Bergeron, M. (2000). Valeurs de fréquence subjective et d’imagerie pour un
échantillon de 1916 substantifs de la langue française. Revue canadienne de psychologie
expérimentale, 54, 274–325.
Dirkx, E., & Craik, F. I. (1992). Age-related differences in memory as a function of imagery
processing. Psychology and Aging, 7, 352–358.
Dixon, R. A., & Hultsch, D. F. (1983). Metamemory and memory for text relationships in
adulthood: A cross-validation study. Journal of Gerontology, 38, 689–694.
Dror, I. E., & Kosslyn, S. M. (1994). Mental imagery and aging. Psychology and Aging, 9,
90–102.
Dunlosky, J., & Hertzog, C. (1998). Aging and deficits in associative memory: What is the
role of strategy production? Psychology and Aging, 13, 597–607.
Dunlosky, J., & Hertzog, C. (2001). Measuring strategy production during associative learning: The relative utility of concurrent versus retrospective reports. Memory & Cognition,
29, 247–253.
Dunlosky, J., Hertzog, C., & Powell-Moman, A. (2005). The contribution of mediator-based
deficiencies to age differences in associative learning. Developmental Psychology, 41, 389–
400.
Duverne, S., & Lemaire, P. (2004). Age-related differences in arithmetic problem-verification
strategies. Journals of Gerontology Series B: Psychological Sciences & Social Sciences,
59B, 135–142.
Duverne, S., & Lemaire, P. (2005). Arithmetic split effects reflect strategy selection: An adult
age comparative study in addition comparison and verification tasks. Canadian Journal of
Experimental Psychology, 59, 262–278.
Folstein, M. F., Folstein, S. E., & McHugh, P. R. (1975). Mini-mental state: A practical method
for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. Journal of Psychiatric Research,
12, 189–198.
Hertzog, C., & Dunlosky, J. (2004). Aging, metacognition, and cognitive control. In B. H.
Ross (Ed.), Advances in research and theory (pp. 215–251). San Diego, CA: Elsevier
Academic Press.
Hertzog, C., Price, J., Burpee, A., Frentzel, W.J., Feldstein, S., & Dunlosky, J. (2009). Why
do people show minimal knowledge updating with task experience: Inferential deficit or
experimental artifact? The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 62, 155–173.
Hulicka, I. M., & Grossman, J. L. (1967). Age-group comparisons for the use of mediators in
paired-associate learning. Journal of Gerontology, 22, 45–51.
Isingrini, M., Fontaine, R., Métras, F., & Bonneau, D. (1994). Vieillissement et codage
imagé en mémoire : effet de la nature du stimulus et d’une consigne d’imagerie. L’Année
Psychologique, 94, 369–384.
Kemps, E., & Newson, R. (2005). Patterns and predictors of adult age differences in mental
imagery. Aging, Neuropsychology & Cognition, 12, 99–128.
Lemaire, P., Arnaud, L., & Lecacheur, M. (2004). Adults’ age-related differences in adaptivity
of strategy choices: Evidence from computational estimation. Psychology and Aging, 19,
467–481.
Light, L. L. (1991). Memory and aging: Four hypotheses in search of data. Annual Review of
Psychology, 42, 333–376.
Mason, S. E., & Smith, A. D. (1977). Imagery in the aged. Experimental Aging Research, 3,
17–32.
Mata, R., Schooler, L. J., & Rieskamp, J. R. (2007). The aging decision maker: Cognitive
aging and the adaptive selection of decision strategies. Psychology and Aging, 22, 796–810.
Mathey, S., & Postal, V. (2008). Le langage. In K. Dujardin & P. Lemaire (Eds.),
Neuropsychologie du vieillissement normal et pathologique (pp. 79–104). Paris: Masson.
Downloaded by [Bibliothèque de l' Université Paris Descartes] at 00:30 18 November 2013
STRATEGY SELECTION AND AGING
211
McDougall, S. J. P., & Velmans, M. (1993). Encoding strategy dynamics: When relationships
between words determine strategy use. British Journal of Psychology, 84, 227–248.
Naveh-Benjamin, M., Brav, T. K., & Levy, O. (2007). The associative memory deficit of older
adults: The role of strategy utilization. Psychology and Aging, 22, 202–208.
O’Hara, R., Brooks, J. O., Friedman, L., Schröder, C. M., Morgan, K. S., & Kraemer, H. C.
(2007). Long-term effects of mnemonic training in community-dwelling older adults.
Journal of Psychiatric Research, 41, 585–590.
Paivio, A., & Yuille, J. C. (1969). Changes in associative strategies and paired-associate
learning over trials as a function of work imagery and type of learning set. Journal of
Experimental Psychology, 79, 458–463.
Palladino, P., & De Beni, R. (2003). When mental images are very detailed: Image generation
and memory performance as a function of age. Acta Psychologica, 113, 297–314.
Payne, J. W., Bettman, J. R., & Johnson, E. J. (1993). The adaptive decision maker. New York,
NY: Cambridge University Press.
Price, J., Hertzog, C., & Dunlosky, J. (2008). Age-related differences in strategy knowledge
updating: Blocked testing produces greater improvements in metacognitive accuracy for
younger than older adults. Aging, Neuropsychology, and Cognition, 15, 601–626.
Richardson, J. T. E. (1998). The availability and effectiveness of reported mediators in associative learning: A historical review and an experimental investigation. Psychonomic Bulletin
& Review, 5, 597–614.
Richardson, J. T. E. (2003). Dual coding versus relational processing in memory for concrete
and abstract words. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 15, 481–509.
Rieskamp, J. R., & Otto, P. E. (2006). SSL: A theory of how people learn to select strategies.
Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 135, 207–236.
Rowe, E. J., & Schnore, M. M. (1971). Item concreteness and reported strategies in pairedassociate learning as a function of age. Journal of Gerontology, 26, 470–475.
Salthouse, T. A. (1991). Theoretical perspectives on cognitive aging. Hillsdale, NJ England:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Schunn, C.D., & Reder, L.M. (2001). Another source of individual differences: Strategy adaptivity to changing rates of success. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 130,
59–76.
Schunn, C. D., Lovett, M. C., & Reder, L. M. (2001). Awareness and working memory in
strategy adaptivity. Memory & Cognition, 29, 254–266.
Scogin, F., & Bienias, J. L. (1988). A three-year follow-up of older adult participants in a
memory-skills training program. Psychology and Aging, 3, 334–337.
Siegler, R. S., & Lemaire, P. (1997). Older and younger adults’ strategy choices in multiplication: Testing predictions of ASCM using the choice/no-choice method. Journal of
Experimental Psychology: General, 126, 71–92.
Stigsdotter, A., & Bäckman, L. (1989). Multifactorial memory training with older adults: How
to foster maintenance of improved performance. Gerontology, 35, 260–267.
Taconnat, L., Baudouin, A., Fay, S., Clarys, D., Vanneste, S., Tournelle, L., et al. (2006).
Aging and implementation of encoding strategies in the generation of rhymes: The role of
executive functions. Neuropsychology, 20, 658–665.
Treat, N., & Reese, H. W. (1976). Age, imagery, and pacing in paired associate learning.
Developmental Psychology, 12, 119–124.
Verhaeghen, P. (2003). Aging and vocabulary score: A meta-analysis. Psychology and Aging,
18, 332–339.
Verhaeghen, P., & Marcoen, A. (1994). Production deficiency hypothesis revisited: Adult age
differences in strategy use as a function of processing resources. Aging & Cognition, 1,
323–338.
Downloaded by [Bibliothèque de l' Université Paris Descartes] at 00:30 18 November 2013
212 ISABELLE TOURNIER AND VIRGINIE POSTAL
Whitbourne, S. K., & Slevin, A. E. (1978). Imagery and sentence retention in elderly and
young adults. Journal of Genetic Psychology, 133, 287.
Yagoubi, R. E., Lemaire, P., & Besson, M. (2003). Different brain mechanisms mediate two
strategies in arithmetic: Evidence from event-related brain potentials. Neuropsychologia,
41, 855–862.
Yagoubi, R. E., Lemaire, P., & Besson, M. (2005). Effects of aging on arithmetic problemsolving: an event-related brain potential study. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 17,
37–50.
Yesavage, J. A. (1985). Nonpharmacologic treatments for memory losses with normal aging.
American Journal of Psychiatry, 142, 600–605.
Yesavage, J. A., Sheikh, J. I., Friedman, L., & Tanke, E. (1990). Learning mnemonics: Roles
of aging and subtle cognitive impairment. Psychology and Aging, 5, 133–137.
APPENDIX
Slide 1
You are going to perform a memory task: 39 pairs of words (e.g., guitar–
church) will appear, one after the other on the computer screen. The
automatic emergence of a new pair will lead to the disappearance of the previous one. Each pair will stay 8 seconds on the screen and an X will announce
the appearance of a new pair. You should try to memorize these 39 pairs in
order to recall the second word (e.g., church) when the first word is presented
(e.g., guitar).
Slide 2
The memorization is composed of three steps:
Encoding: when information is recorded and eventually stored.
Storage: maintenance of information in memory.
Retrieval: retrieval of information stored.
These steps can be made more efficient with the use of memory strategies.
Slide 3
To learn pairs of words, different strategies can be used depending on the
nature of the words presented. Here are the three main ones.
Imagery: this is linking words within a same image, preferentially by
making interacting items. Thus, for the pair “guitar–church”, you could make
the image of a guitar in the shape of a church. Although imagery is very
effortful, it is a very efficacious strategy for concrete words for which it is
easy to form an image. On the contrary, it will be difficult to form an image
with the abstract pair “ambition–theory”.
Downloaded by [Bibliothèque de l' Université Paris Descartes] at 00:30 18 November 2013
STRATEGY SELECTION AND AGING
213
Sentence: this is linking words within the same sentence. The sentence
strategy is less effortful than imagery, but also less efficacious than imagery
for concrete pairs. On the contrary, sentence is more efficacious than imagery
for abstract words, for which it is easy to form an image. Thus, for the pair
“ambition–theory”, you could create “the ambition to make a theory”.
Repetition: this is rote repetition of words (e.g., guitar–church–guitar–
church–etc.). Repetition is less effortful than imagery or sentence but also
less efficacious.
Slide 4
For this task, you will try to memorize paired-associates, in order to recall the
second word when the first word is presented on the screen (e.g., guitar–?).
Using strategies (imagery, sentence or repetition) could help you better memorize, so you need to use a strategy that seems to you as the most effective
and with which you feel at ease.
Do you have any questions?